I 'know' [the Bible is true] because I am here and I am living. There is no way in heck something as complex as a human was created by a big bang (no one knows were the matter for that came from), Abiogenesis (big deal, they made amino acids), and random mutations (which are 99.9% of the time harmful). Go to AnwersInGenesis.org. They are the leading Creationist scientists and their site is full of evidance.

DNA is information. A program determining the form of an organism and its survival mechanisms which is incorporated into it`s design. Information can only orginate from a mind. Information and the mind that creates it are both non material entities. It is clear that the intelligence which created the information constituting DNA in every organism vastly exceeds ours. It is indisputable that God exists and therefore we exist in his image. Those who deny God`s existence are deceiving themselves at their peril.

I don't think I'm ever going to learn the "evidance". Is that like the little jigs Pentecostals do in church? Random mutations are not harmful 99.9% of the time. A mutation is just a change. We can see this in the mutations happening in virus' making them more immune to our drugs. The flu is a good case of this. It's constantly evolving into stronger forms. As far as your proof that the bible is real simply because you exist, that's about the dumbest thing I've heard. I exist, and it's not because of your sky fairy, it's because of the scientific processes that got me here. If you trust AiG, then you've got some real problems. Read about some real science. AiG has none.

Mutations are a distortion of already existing genetic information. No new information is created from mutations(which is required for darwinian evolution). Mutations can be sometimes beneficial to an organism under certain circumstances. But it becomes even more vulnerable and less survivable once the special circumstance in which the mutation allowed it to survive is lifted. The experiments conducted on countles generations of fruit flys caused many strange and harmful mutations, but never produced a new better, stronger, or smarter organism-only countless deformed fruit flys. This is living proof mutations do not drive so called bacteria-to-man evolution.

even if mutations were harmful 99.9% of the time that would mean they are beneficial 0.1% considering the millions upon millions of mutations that have happened over the millions of year the earth has existed evolution can still occur under your stupid model.

"There is no way in heck something as complex as a human was created by a big bang (no one knows were the matter for that came from)"
You fail physics forever.

"random mutations (which are 99.9% of the time harmful)"
100% of creationist statistics are pulled out of their lower orifices. How do you even calculate something like this? You'd need who knows how many man-hours (and as I've done as much calculation as you have I'll content myself with saying it'd be a number with many zeroes) to go through every single protein in even the simplest organism and look at the effects of every possible mutation in order to ascertain what proportion of these would negatively affect its functioning. And then you'd have to do this with every species on the planet, and then you'd still only be certain of the proportion of harmful mutations for extant species.

Pro-tip: if you're going to pull statistics out of thin air, at least make it less obvious that they have no basis.

When I want to know what cutting-edge science offers regarding complex theories like the origins of the universe and life itself, I consult teens. Teenagers know EVERYTHING! They have all the evidance.

@wardmjwrd--Given the erudition of your comments, I would just bet that you are a teenager. I recommend that you find a way to get your message out to the broader public because we deeply need your wisdom to guide diverse fields of research, such as genetics and medicine. Perhaps you should post on a Teen's Board.

They might be the leading creationists, but as creationism is not science (as stated in Kitzmiller vs Dover), this means absolutely nothing.
I might just as well go to the leading Aesir schollars to find "evidance" of the origin of life.

Why the Bible specificaly? Every single religion that has ever existed has a story of the creation of the Eart.
What makes the Bible story more plausible than all the others? Because it has copied many of the older ones, or what?